I'm currently listening to: "Social" by Matthew Lieberman. He says that people with autism often have hypersensitivity to their environment and the people in it. They may seem detached outwardly, but are feeling overwhelmed internally and go back to being in isolation, because being amongst unpredictable and overwhelming people feels terrifying to them.
I can only speak for aspergers but there is a total misconception that this form of autism lacks empathy, i would say it is the complete opposite and they chooe to deny it or dissociate from it. Sometimes the logical brain overides the emotional one in terms of a solution. Psychopaths feel nothing apart from sadistic pleasure so how can they be empathic?
I have high levels of empathy. It did decrease over time a bit because of constant negative encounters with other humans. People like to take advantage of kind hearted people. I learned that the hard way. Like the time I let a homeless chick move in with me because I felt bad for her and she just stole from me and did drugs in my home!
Simon Baron Cohen, strange how neurotypicals say autistics have a deficit in understanding the feelings of others, but neurotypicals have such a poor understanding of the feelings of autistics.
It has been my experience that people with psychopathic tendencies seem to be attracted to people with Aspergers and I didn't realize until fairly recently that my attraction to psychopaths is because they can pretend to understand me the way Aspies do. I think part of the reason Aspies don't seem empathetic is that almost everything is processed through our logic filter. I may feel very moved by something but I rarely know the socially appropriate way to show that. I am a very touchy-feely Aspie, but with our current social stigma about physical contact and as many times as I've been told my behavior wasn't appropriate for one reason or another, I am very worried about appearances so have no idea what to do when faced with an emotional situation. We don't get to just act on our instincts, we have to try to imagine what the majority would want us to do in order to avoid being ridiculed, mocked, or even physically attacked and honestly it is much harder than figuring out the behavior of other animals because most humans lie a lot. It is almost like three different species: "normal" people in the middle of the curve, excellent actors with no feeling for others on the left, and those with genuine concern for others to the point of social paralysis on the right. There are some people with little empathy of either type who can't even pretend to care about their own children let alone strangers. It's surprising that people don't pick up on it easily but they aren't as dangerous as the psychopaths. Those with little empathy whatsoever are about as dangerous as all of the others in the middle who will go along with the group or authority figure in most situations.
"my attraction to psychopaths is because they can pretend to understand me" ...wow, you know I never actually looked at it that way, but I definitely have had issues with attracting and befriending people who turned out to be rotten to the core. I've asked myself a hundred times, "How does this keep happening!?" I'm Aspergers and was raised by a couple textbook cases of narcissistic personality disorder, so that doesn't help either... but I wonder if I put up with their treatment as much as I did partly because they *did* pretend to be something more like what they should have been at times when they wanted to. In the end, though, it was all for them, and I was only ever a possession to be pushed around at their whim. This bled into other relationships for many years, including my former marriage, and I've become almost completely walled-off because of it, to avoid being hurt like that again.
@@tirsden Hi, are you familiar with people who have the HSP gene? Psychopaths go after them too relationship wise. I am very sorry your parents were Narcissists. I grew up dealing with one of each. Life has many lessons. Not knowing I was isolating myself due to past experiences it was like one day I wanted to be social and every one was gone. Please don't shut people out too much. The older we get the harder it is to meet people and make friends. I hope you do have friends or family you can trust and be yourself around.
HSPs are 20% of the human population. The 200 different animal species including marine life that were studied 20% of them had the HSP gene. We get overwhelmed because we can feel what others are feeling plus we take in everything around us. I thought I was on the Aspie scale for a while. We have to have alone time time, day, week, whatever it takes to reenergize because being around other people can drain us. We do not do crowds. Is this something you relate too? I would appreciate your input and the first woman's in this thread but I didn't know how to include her also.
@@christineh4782 I don't know of a specific gene involved, but I do know that a portion of my symptoms are related to my acute senses. I would love more information, if you have it.
Simon Baron Cohen is god's gift to students. After seven decades living Autistic I am just now able to understand empathy. When in high school we had two social groupings greasers (bikers) and soches (super social people). I was autistic and lived in the solitary outdoor group (super anti-socials). The soches were definitely the more cruel and they learned their cruel craft using their smiling faces and "appropriate" fit in emotions, the greasers were more direct physical bullies. I knew them all well ~~> whole social scene was like a hot stove me walking far far around. I believe my then and now responses is simply to protect/guard my high level native affective hard won empathy.
Here's an example from an aspie perspective If you cry - I'll cry If you are angry - I'll become angry If you give me affection - I feel affection toward you If you tell me your story hoping to evoke an emotional reaction I may not be able to do so If I can't read the emotion coming from you (you may be suppressing it or hiding it) then I can feel a bit blank and not know what to do or say because I have to try and 'guess' how you feel - which would, I assume, involve theory of mind My brain would have to grapple with things like 'how might I feel if that was me in that story he's just told?' 'How would I want to be treated if I were them?' And of course all of this happens too slowly in my brain - so what you perceive is a person who is saying and doing nothing in response to what you just said!
I have gone though these emotions just this weekend with other people's drama spilling out into my life (inadvertently) and I struggled with what I was being told as I couldn't get a good enough read on what their body language and behaviors were trying to convey and it's turned my brain to scrambled egg. So, much so that I ended up exhausted and sleeping though all of yesterday.
Hi diane. I'm very interested in the aspie perspective. Id appreciate your point of view on the following: What if a loved one told you that something you were doing/saying was inappropriate and offensive. He/she asked you to to stop it because it was very emotionally painful for them. Would you heed their concerns and respond appropriately (by stopping the behaviour immediately and apologising) or would you continue you behaviour because you feel that, logically, there is nothing wrong with your behaviour and emotions should have nothing to do with it?
@@farhanaghumra1632 I suspect that I am autistic but haven't been tested. What I personally would do there depends heavily on the context - it depends on what I did and why. But in the majority of cases I will apologise and try to be better. If I don't it's because I don't believe their feeling hurt is my fault (probably because it resulted from misunderstandings, which aren't anyone's fault).
@@farhanaghumra1632 hi, I was diagnosed I would ask "why?" I would be confused by how it could be affecting them. Depending on their answer, I might do either. If I can't logically see how my behavior is related, I wouldn't change. But if I can, I'll try to modify my behavior to make them happy, because I can understand why it bothers them.
Wow, thank you so much. I love teaching about the importance of empathy to my childcare & education students, we will certainly be watching this in class. Easy to understand & thought provoking. Fantastic!!!!!
simon what a beautiful presentation. Loved the table showing clearly that autistics have an abundance of that awesome affective empathy that the world needs so much!!
I'm very grateful to Simon Baron Cohen for his eloquent highly informative talk on a subject of great importance to us all. For a mere 12 minute talk this was a very focussed and easy to digest exposition.
This was actually disproved recently. Though at the time, that was certainly what people thought. Though what he said was incorrect, I'm not going to blame him for that, because the evidence that disproved it came out after this video.
Actually I disagree with the idea of evil being a supernatural force. I see good and evil and being 'beneficial' or 'harmful' to survival of others. Evil behavior therefore, is that which causes harm to others. We can break it down to: Evil is egocentric narcissism minus affective empathy. In other words, good vs evil are just words used to explain a complex set of behaviours and effects thereof.
Also the concept of morality is deeply affected by whats acceptable in the "current" society. Therefore a person can acknowledge that his action is "morally unacceptable" but at the same time think his action is good because it is beneficial acording to his values.
@@henrywang6931 - Interesting, I don't see morality as a societal construct, but as a personal set of rules. If society defines morality, then whatever is legal in your surroundings would be "moral" whereas illegal things would be "immoral." I take great issue with that thought, because certain things are legal in my country that I consider to be highly immoral. And the religion I used to belong to was allll about moral versus immoral things, but I disagree on many of that religion's opinions about what is and isn't immoral, so implying religion can substitute for society on "what is moral?" doesn't count for me either. Now, what you've said may be true for a lot of people who would rather let society/religion think for them, so you do have a point there, but I think it's a sad point.
"The psychopaths only showed reduced physiological response when they saw people in distress." But if they had no affective empathy, shouldn't that response be equal to the neutral case, not lower?
Empathy is like humor, it can include and exclude. Empathy is not a virtue, but a way of targeting compassion. That's why a lack of cognitive empathy (i.e. Autism) can lead to universal compassion. Ironically, the presence of empathy is necessary for selectively withholding compassion.
great great talk, didn't know there were two kinds of empathy and good to know it! maybe at the end in the benefits of empathy part, use arguments that can convince people lacking empathy (in addition to "solving conflicts). Because I'm not sure they care about conflicts stopping. My question is : how to convice these people that it's good for them to balance their lack of empathy with à work on how they behave. also, can empathy be learnt if it can be unlearnt ? and how?
especially affective empathy one is mostly born with - but it can be ruined. watching too much horrific movies etc. or being told that what you are feeling is not ok. so empathy can also be fostered in ppl - i have made the experience that if you affectively empathize with ppl, about 99% are actually very touched by your genuine emotion and respect for their feelings. i triggers their (positive) weak spot. most ppl cannot help the re-empathize one you empathize. so one can actually start a empathy-evoking positive spiral this way. also, have a pet, treat it nicely and open your heart up to animals, smell a flower, watch a butterfly dance in the air, be amazed by the beauty of a little glittery rock - and of course - nurture a baby - all that makes you feel yourself and the world and also it makes your body produce oxytocin - the wonderdrug that makes you love.
I disagree with what you are saying based on my own life experiences. One example is being through a job loss. When you hear of another person going through a job loss you can feel bad for them ( sympathetic ). When you hear of another person going through a job loss you can truly understand where they are at and put yourself in their shoes because you've been there. You can understand that the issues go much deeper than missing a paycheck.
I was expecting more from this speech. He explained why some have empathy (in scientific terms) and why empathy is good (using just rhetoric arguments), but is there anything that could be done to change the biology of brain and hormones of those who lack (affective) empathy, therefore are dangerous to those around them?
COMPASSION is CARING about the others feelings etc. EMPATHY is KNOWING what the other is feeling etc. Sadists may have lots EMPATHY. They KNOW what will hurt the other person. They are Lacking COMPASSION!
Completely wrong! I work in the field for many years. The person diagnosed with ASD doesn't lack cognitive empathy! Rather if we peal back the most basic surface we will almost invariably find amygdala fear based responses, e.g., over active sensory challenges or hypo, underactive sensory processing challenges, which then results in a withdrawing or ALL or Nothing responses, endocrine wise (HPA axis) increased cortisol reduced oxytocin, etc. Now, when that individual becomes more "comfortable to engage in back and forth reciprocal social-emotional engagement" (i.e., not overwhelmed) then what appeared to be prior "significant deficits in cognitive empathy" no longer exists or is significantly continuously moderately by that individual to feel comfortable and embodied rather than withdrawn, over-reactive or disassociated from social-emotional engagement. This is mirrored to large degrees with complex PTSD.
This video was a few years ago, some improvements have been made. I personally think we're more so delayed. The part about testosterone was also disproven recently.
Would you say that for someone with autism, it's easier for them to know what someone is feeling when the person with autism is an observer/third person compared to when they are the direct second-person? Also, are people with autism better at understanding people's feelings than they are at understanding/knowing the other person's thoughts/motives?
Perhaps people with autism have both forms of Empathy but our empathy goes with the expressions and body language not the words because we see the deceit on a subconscious level
The problem with Baron Cohen is that he doesn't make it clear enough that autistics (often but not always) lack only cognitive empathy. Psychopaths and autistics are opposites - as he says part way through but there are a lot of stupid people (some of whom have made comments) and this needs to be spelled out from them right at the beginning because they don't have the required IQ level to understand the slight waffling style of Baron Cohen. I'm autistic and so are my children. I could cry at this ignorance; not for me but for all the innocent, caring, sensitive autistics whose characters are being denigrated.
+penny mcdonagh He's not linking autistic people with psychopaths. He said that their psychology mirrors each other, based on empathy subsets, rooted in the cognitive and affective parts of what constitutes empathy scientifically. Allegorically, it is a character or personality foil. Classic and chief amongst these in a Western Christian perspective might be the story of Cain and Abel.
Sorry if I wasn't able to expound upon my perspective in a way that I'd have liked, but what I was trying to convey is just what you shared. Autistic and sociopathic behavior are as you said, in opposition based on their empathy profiles. Thank you for being so rigorous!
He isn't willing to acknowledge that his earlier work (Sally-Anne test, which is highly criticized as profoundly flawed) was not only incorrect, but very damaging tot he autistic community. So he came along later with his distinction between cognitive empathy and affective empathy (intellectually dishonest). And still, in the titles of his books and talks, he continues to link autistics to sociopathy, evil and a lack of empathy, thereby continuing the damage he did originally. I am autistic and an academic, and I have rarely seen such tenacity in intellectual dishonesty in my life. I think Simon Baron-Cohen owes the autistic community a real apology and he should stop protecting his flawed research and do something to provide redress for the harm he has caused.
I got stuck within two minutes, when Simon Baron-Cohen says that traditionally, humans have explained away cruel behaviour to being possessed by a supernatural force, after which we'd say the human is bad. Logically, it would be the supernatural being possessing the human that is bad, not the human.....so it is not circular after all. : /
I think you've entangled the two points a little bit further than what was intended. He's merely pointing out the oft unexamined understanding of 'evil'.
***** If you had any respect for 'serious academic work' you'd use logical argument and not unsubstantiated ad hominem to discuss this point. We are 'wrong' about either comment? They're both just interpretations of particular comments he made during the video. How are they 'wrong'?
***** So they are incorrect because they are incorrect! Thanks for that. How about taking a class in fundamental logic. I pinned you as a moron based on your first comment but decided to give you a second chance. I see that hasn't worked out.
***** Incorrect because I am incorrect = circular logic. You may not have specifically used those terms but you've yet to produce a rationale explaining why Mira or I are wrong. I asked "How are they wrong?" referring to my comment and Mira's. You answered "They are factual statements that are in correct." (sic) That is circular logic.
***** this is great. so you're proposing that, as a statement of fact by the way, that it is incorrect to infer from the speaker that that the concept of evil is used without appropriate examination, because I've apparently insinuated that it was a statement of fact - which I didn't - I wrote 'I think' at the beginning of the comment for a reason. But then the concept of "God" I am supposed to take as a fact? Really? Where is the evidence for the existence of a God? Because people say so in ancient writings? And of course 'all people' in 'the past'. The past extends to every second before that talk was spoken. He doesn't mean that literally everyone in the past thought that. He was using it as a metaphor to describe our collectively improved understanding of mental illness. You need to understand there are different rules of discussion for different platforms based on their ends. The idea of this TED talk isn't to propose universal facts on the nature of 'evil' it is to stimulate wider discussion on the idea of 'evil' and disseminate a different way of approaching it. Not every statement needs to exist in perfect factual and semantic accuracy. Academic rules of discussion don't apply to youtube comments either. Certain liberties need to be taken by the reader and the commenter. You are just going around the internet calling people 'wrong' and 'mentally deficient' who disagree with you.
Another Aspie chiming in here disagreeing that we can't have proper cognitive empathy, because I have it in spades and as others here have pointed out, it can get so intense it's overwhelming. But there's more in this presentation that bugs me, especially regarding separating empathy into two distinct types that are then charted into neat little categories. Let's look at what that means at face value: High cognitive, high affective: I see someone crying on the subway. I feel their pain. I walk over and ask, "Are you okay? Do you need help?" High cognitive, low affective: I see someone crying on the subway. I feel their pain. I leave. (Maybe I feel horrible for leaving, but I still leave.) Low cognitive, low affective: I see someone crying on the subway. I don't feel their pain. I leave. (And I don't feel bad about it at all.) Low cognitive, high affective: I see someone crying on the subway. I don't feel their pain. I walk over and ask, "Are you okay? Do you need help?" I find that last category a bit jarring. It feels like a logic error. What kind of leap does it take, to offer help to someone without first feeling a sense of shared pain? It reads more like a nice-societal impulse, a "doing the right thing" moment, but does that really count as empathy? I guess if these categories really exist, the last combination is the one I least understand, and I want to disbelieve it exists at all. I want to say that mimicking an empathy-like interaction isn't empathy; in the above example it's a good deed, yes, but not empathy. And I think that's where the categories fall apart, and draws attention to how the rest may be fundamentally flawed as well. I feel like the first two categories belong together, in that the second example could be a person who has had negative life experiences regarding helping others, or being offered help from others. So yeah, breaking something as complex as empathy into two categories with high/low variants just doesn't work, in my utterly biased opinion.
Do you grow your own veg or do you buy it in a shop? If you buy it in a shop, do you source the produce (find out where, and how, and by whom it is grown/gathered)? Vegans always talk about how cruel it is to eat meat, and they might have a point, but most I've encountered overlook the conditions the immigrant workers who gather their food work and live in. Not exactly a great showing of empathy either.
I argue that the child inherited the pathology, and there was a sense of parental love, because the parent also had that pathology. Not because of what the parent did or didn’t do.
Is it possible that people with autism are simply more honest? Or more connected with their bodily expressions and emotions interconnected with The words they say? Is it possible that people without autism are struggling between the right and left brain, one side of the brain controlling their subconscious showing through to people with autism through their bodily expressions and language, this being read and processed by the person with autism and not matching the words creating an emotional turmoil in the individual with autism? Is it possible that it's the people without autism that have their minds split and their expressions are not actually lies but just a separate brain speaking than the words coming out of their mouth? Can someone with autism that has been trained how to control their autonomic nervous system become human lie detectors?
-So THAT's why I want to brutally exterminate all psychopaths, while performing cruel-but-effective experiments on them... Cool. Knowledge can be so healing.
Yes, there's several ways, Simon's work is effectively a map and offers no solutions but an in-depth assessment of what need to be done, a company granted by SENS foundation has found ways to recover what Simon revealed to be the empathy circuit by inducing developmental plasticity and neurogenesis. Autism/Sociopathy is curable by these means, but unfortunately are currently tedious, expensive and not refined for mass treatment, read Simon's book The Science of Evil, it's very informative.
Yes,because all morality rests on what people eat. /s If anything,given the hierarchical nature of human development,I would say care of animals would be higher on the list.This is reached at different times by different people, but humans weren't able to have math before they were able to survive. We can't even get people to care about the poor in America-Once we do, we'll gradually move to respect for animals. Culture and art, like animal rights is a component of societal development.
Seems there is not always a correlate between what he calls empathy (whatever he thinks is good) and the economy of practician. World view dominates whatever the disposition being practiced, whether for good or for evil. In this model empathy, Hitler was wonderful in his circle of believers, full of empathy for the master race. There must be an idea to embrace that is good, or it's all about useless passion.
Empathy is merely the ability to feel for another person, and to act upon it as if that other was oneself. A doctor might feel for his suffering patient, yet amputate his leg to save his life - choosing to empathize with the patient's desire to live over his feelings of pain and loss. Murder, widely accepted as The ultimate evil, is not necessarily an act of cruelty. One might shoot an armed home invader to death, not from lack of empathy to the burglar, but out of true empathy to his endangered family. Hitler had no empathy for his own people either, as individuals, only as an extension of his self, them being the source of his power. He was a cruel man in all respects, and that was the basis to the formation of distorted views that justified genocide, saying "My people are Me, and therefor worthy". Everyone else who is not like "Me" (i.e. blond hair and toothbrush mustache) is a lower form of life that do not deserve to exist. One comes to such ideas of dehumanization of other races only from total lack of empathy on the personal level.
Charlie Fiddler "Hitler had no empathy for his own people either, as individuals, only as an extension of his self, them being the source of his power." But why couldn't you just say that the man shooting the burglar because he empathized with his family, only did so because they were "extensions" of him as well?
Martin Årvik Martin Årvik That was only an example. One would probably do the same to protect a friend's children, or even just an innocent stranger, often putting oneself in danger. That is a perfectly selfless act. Would an officer first ask a victim "are you from MY county" before shooting the armed attacker? of course not! He empathizes with the victim who is thinking "I want to live! Why should I die because of this evil jerk?" and he responds by doing what the victim would have done himself, if in his power. He eliminates the threat, killing in the process a menace that forfeited his own right to live by knowingly electing to forfeit a fellow human's life. He might also try to empathize to some degree with the criminal, by putting himself in his place, but than he thinks: "But I wouldn't be doing this!". At most, he might attempt to only maim him, if at all possible. I think this course of action would be an objective result of both logical and emotional analysis, and definitely an instinctive reaction. Some people might even find the courage to selflessly kill themselves or a loved one, if they thought they were presenting a threat to others. Hitler, on the other hand, hung many of his top generals including innocent parents wives and children, mercilessly wiping out the families of those that were closest to him, based on the slightest suspicion (that eventually was found to have been purposely leaked by the enemy!)
Your right, He gave no real life situations to explain anything, Just other peoples tripe experiments, { Asking hardened criminals poisoned to society to weep because they were shown a kid crying who for all they know just dropped their ice cream } And he completely missed out the difference between sympathy and empathy, As to the drug idea, There are anti psychotic drugs etc,, But a drug administered to make you care and think of others ? Very unlikely, If at all possible
Interesting that you point out someone's opinion on a picture matters, or confusion over what actually might be going on behind the picture. I was recently playing Fallout 76 and followed a quest involving a missing child. To avoid spoilers in case anyone cares, I'll be brief and say that the quest involves an audio recording of the child talking to his abductor. The kid's tone of voice and shrieking says to the empathy part of my brain, "oh my gods, he's literally dying or pleading for his life." The actual words of the recording? He's begging for a present the guy is promising him. The voice actor played the kid so spoiled and demanding that his not being immediately handed the present has him sounding like his very life is being ripped from him.
Has anyone tested our political leaders [ cameeron, obama, etc] for cognative or affective empathy, i would be astonished if they dont have a very low degree of either.
please teach my Prime Minister Scott Morrison empathy he needs to raise Pensions and Newstart to prevent Suicide in pensioners and unemployed people he is without a social conscience
dude is arguing that one is responsible. a psychological, or sociopathalilogical person does know the rules. we can't put them all to death. we have to find different ways.
The example of the Israeli and Palestinian peace campaigners is a false one. All of the factors that work against empathy are fully employed by the oppressors when one group of people seek to oppress another group of people. Most Israelis have much more work to do to recover their empathy than the Palestinians because for them it is not a question of individual psychology, collectively they have deliberately adjusted their moral values to meet their material and territorial goals.
I would imagine it would be lower given the nature of politicians. However, as a measure among the politicians themselves, I would imagine people like Obama vs. Romney, Romney would likely show lower levels empathy, given the nature of most businessmen.
Baron-Cohen is just factually wrong in citing the study of a photo of a man's eyes and four guesses as to the man's emotions: feeling sorry, bored, interested, joking. Film editor Lev Kuleshov already proved the folly of such tests. A test like this also fails in ruling out the possibility of everyday performativities like irony, sarcasm, impersonation, etc in which we affect expressions intentionally contrary to our meaning. The only correct answer is: not enough information. The real lack of affective empathy comes in not seeing the obviousness of the test's flaws.
I am a Nihilist. I do not view Morality as having any weight or natural occurrence in the universe. However, despite my lack of belief in the concepts of Good and Evil, I am still a feminist, a socialist, and I anything but apathetic to the plight of others. I enjoy seeing others laugh and enjoy themselves. As social progress is made, I am pleased. Not because feminism, socialism, Bernie Sanders, or justice are "Good" things, but rather because I have an empathetic connection with my fellow humans and desire to see as many people as possible as satisfied as possible. Nihilism and Apathy do not always mix.
+peytongonavy I ask because your self definition of nihilist while then adhering to ideologies and power figures is a bit off putting from where I'm sitting. Would you or have you thought about how nihilism when matched with an acceptance of group relations and authoritative figures can be.....well, at best a roll of the dice for the simple welfare of those people you claim to desire to see satisfied. Would you do a better job than those "leaders?" Because just by saying they don't always mix, you have not stated they don't mix in you...I got quite the other impression actually. Do you see your logic error above? Did you intend it is another question. ;-)
Ooana. I consider my affective empathy very high. I care deeply about the pain suffered by others. My cognitive empathy I'm still investigating. I've come to the conclusion that I can't read sarcasm, like, AT ALL. But, if I may use some video game lingo, my "speech skill" is very high. That is, I'm a terrific liar and I'm pretty good at getting people to like me. Also, at the risk of sounding arrogant, I must consider that I got pretty lucky with my genes. My parents are attractive people and as a result, I would consider myself attractive. Looking the way I do makes it a lot easier to talk people around to my way of thinking when we're face to face.
Sounds like it might be psyop propaganda to me, as it encourages the 'feelings over facts' nonsense in a very sneaky way. He presents some "facts" with the "feelings" and makes you think its balanced, but fails to mention a massive chunk of sociological impact from "empathy". The issue is far too broad and complex to simply suggest "more empathy" is the solution, but saying that does leave the masses open to further exploit.
Empathy is a total FANTASY, a complete lie!, there is ONLY sympathy. No one actually resonates with another person's pain, but they can assign similarities with what they themselves MAY have felt.
Good vs Evil: God vs Satan. God's trump card, Jesus. People are influenced by their environment and spiritual factors to behave as they do, and then, of their own free will, act. Without an acceptance of God's will, can and will eventually be unempathetic.
It is funny how averse people are to this term "evil". I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but I'm starting to wonder if it's just part of Satan's plan to conveniently let the world forget he was ever there.
there's got to be a better example than 9/11. stopped watching at 3:31. BIG SUBJECT, including the acceptance that terrorists flew planes into the WTC's.
I'm currently listening to: "Social" by Matthew Lieberman. He says that people with autism often have hypersensitivity to their environment and the people in it. They may seem detached outwardly, but are feeling overwhelmed internally and go back to being in isolation, because being amongst unpredictable and overwhelming people feels terrifying to them.
Yep.
I can only speak for aspergers but there is a total misconception that this form of autism lacks empathy, i would say it is the complete opposite and they chooe to deny it or dissociate from it. Sometimes the logical brain overides the emotional one in terms of a solution. Psychopaths feel nothing apart from sadistic pleasure so how can they be empathic?
Saw the bell curve? Sadists are the tiny right lip of the curve. The belly of the curve are not sadistic.
chris saint "psychopaths feel nothing apart from sadistic pleasure..." Tell that to Athena Walker on Quora. She will be so angry with you.
Yep
I have high levels of empathy.
It did decrease over time a bit because of constant negative encounters with other humans.
People like to take advantage of kind hearted people.
I learned that the hard way.
Like the time I let a homeless chick move in with me because I felt bad for her and she just stole from me and did drugs in my home!
Simon Baron Cohen, strange how neurotypicals say autistics have a deficit in understanding the feelings of others, but neurotypicals have such a poor understanding of the feelings of autistics.
It's not strange. They can't relate obviously.
It has been my experience that people with psychopathic tendencies seem to be attracted to people with Aspergers and I didn't realize until fairly recently that my attraction to psychopaths is because they can pretend to understand me the way Aspies do. I think part of the reason Aspies don't seem empathetic is that almost everything is processed through our logic filter. I may feel very moved by something but I rarely know the socially appropriate way to show that. I am a very touchy-feely Aspie, but with our current social stigma about physical contact and as many times as I've been told my behavior wasn't appropriate for one reason or another, I am very worried about appearances so have no idea what to do when faced with an emotional situation. We don't get to just act on our instincts, we have to try to imagine what the majority would want us to do in order to avoid being ridiculed, mocked, or even physically attacked and honestly it is much harder than figuring out the behavior of other animals because most humans lie a lot.
It is almost like three different species: "normal" people in the middle of the curve, excellent actors with no feeling for others on the left, and those with genuine concern for others to the point of social paralysis on the right. There are some people with little empathy of either type who can't even pretend to care about their own children let alone strangers. It's surprising that people don't pick up on it easily but they aren't as dangerous as the psychopaths. Those with little empathy whatsoever are about as dangerous as all of the others in the middle who will go along with the group or authority figure in most situations.
"my attraction to psychopaths is because they can pretend to understand me" ...wow, you know I never actually looked at it that way, but I definitely have had issues with attracting and befriending people who turned out to be rotten to the core. I've asked myself a hundred times, "How does this keep happening!?" I'm Aspergers and was raised by a couple textbook cases of narcissistic personality disorder, so that doesn't help either... but I wonder if I put up with their treatment as much as I did partly because they *did* pretend to be something more like what they should have been at times when they wanted to. In the end, though, it was all for them, and I was only ever a possession to be pushed around at their whim. This bled into other relationships for many years, including my former marriage, and I've become almost completely walled-off because of it, to avoid being hurt like that again.
@@tirsden Hi, are you familiar with people who have the HSP gene? Psychopaths go after them too relationship wise. I am very sorry your parents were Narcissists. I grew up dealing with one of each. Life has many lessons.
Not knowing I was isolating myself due to past experiences it was like one day I wanted to be social and every one was gone. Please don't shut people out too much. The older we get the harder it is to meet people and make friends. I hope you do have friends or family you can trust and be yourself around.
HSPs are 20% of the human population. The 200 different animal species including marine life that were studied 20% of them had the HSP gene. We get overwhelmed because we can feel what others are feeling plus we take in everything around us. I thought I was on the Aspie scale for a while. We have to have alone time time, day, week, whatever it takes to reenergize because being around other people can drain us. We do not do crowds. Is this something you relate too? I would appreciate your input and the first woman's in this thread but I didn't know how to include her also.
@@christineh4782 I don't know of a specific gene involved, but I do know that a portion of my symptoms are related to my acute senses. I would love more information, if you have it.
Simon Baron Cohen is god's gift to students. After seven decades living Autistic I am just now able to understand empathy. When in high school we had two social groupings greasers (bikers) and soches (super social people). I was autistic and lived in the solitary outdoor group (super anti-socials). The soches were definitely the more cruel and they learned their cruel craft using their smiling faces and "appropriate" fit in emotions, the greasers were more direct physical bullies. I knew them all well ~~> whole social scene was like a hot stove me walking far far around. I believe my then and now responses is simply to protect/guard my high level native affective hard won empathy.
G capital G for God as in “For God’s sake, … .” etc. Common error by younger generation including media.
What I really liked about his book is that he differentiated between antisocial personalities and those like me, with autism spectrum disorder.
Here's an example from an aspie perspective
If you cry - I'll cry
If you are angry - I'll become angry
If you give me affection - I feel affection toward you
If you tell me your story hoping to evoke an emotional reaction I may not be able to do so
If I can't read the emotion coming from you (you may be suppressing it or hiding it) then I can feel a bit blank and not know what to do or say because I have to try and 'guess' how you feel - which would, I assume, involve theory of mind
My brain would have to grapple with things like 'how might I feel if that was me in that story he's just told?'
'How would I want to be treated if I were them?' And of course all of this happens too slowly in my brain - so what you perceive is a person who is saying and doing nothing in response to what you just said!
I have gone though these emotions just this weekend with other people's drama spilling out into my life (inadvertently) and I struggled with what I was being told as I couldn't get a good enough read on what their body language and behaviors were trying to convey and it's turned my brain to scrambled egg. So, much so that I ended up exhausted and sleeping though all of yesterday.
Hi diane. I'm very interested in the aspie perspective. Id appreciate your point of view on the following:
What if a loved one told you that something you were doing/saying was inappropriate and offensive. He/she asked you to to stop it because it was very emotionally painful for them. Would you heed their concerns and respond appropriately (by stopping the behaviour immediately and apologising) or would you continue you behaviour because you feel that, logically, there is nothing wrong with your behaviour and emotions should have nothing to do with it?
@@farhanaghumra1632 I suspect that I am autistic but haven't been tested. What I personally would do there depends heavily on the context - it depends on what I did and why. But in the majority of cases I will apologise and try to be better. If I don't it's because I don't believe their feeling hurt is my fault (probably because it resulted from misunderstandings, which aren't anyone's fault).
@@farhanaghumra1632 hi, I was diagnosed
I would ask "why?"
I would be confused by how it could be affecting them. Depending on their answer, I might do either. If I can't logically see how my behavior is related, I wouldn't change. But if I can, I'll try to modify my behavior to make them happy, because I can understand why it bothers them.
This is true
the greatest advocate, scientist and love the way Prof Simon Baron Cohen speaks on autism
People have a potential and expressed version of most any mental system. IQ, empathy, aggression, etc.
Thank you Prof. Baron-Cohen !
This man speaks the most beautiful English
Wow, thank you so much. I love teaching about the importance of empathy to my childcare & education students, we will certainly be watching this in class. Easy to understand & thought provoking. Fantastic!!!!!
Appropriate to speak about psychopaths in the Houses of Parliament
:))
Irony
socialism
communism
Islam
I hope prosperterianism takes off
Thank you so much for this! So insghtful!
simon what a beautiful presentation. Loved the table showing clearly that autistics have an abundance of that awesome affective empathy that the world needs so much!!
I'm very grateful to Simon Baron Cohen for his eloquent highly informative talk on a subject of great importance to us all. For a mere 12 minute talk this was a very focussed and easy to digest exposition.
This talk really opens my eyes wider.
Thank you for sharing this. It is very enlightening to have some data on this specific subject.
it would be nice to know more about the link between testosterone and the amygdala in the process
This was actually disproved recently. Though at the time, that was certainly what people thought. Though what he said was incorrect, I'm not going to blame him for that, because the evidence that disproved it came out after this video.
@@SarahAbramova this is 9 months too late. But could you link your source on this please.
3:50 ~ their ideological beliefs led to a lack of empathy
This aged incredibly well looking at the extreme left and extreme right.
First off not all autistic people lack cognitive empathy, but why should anyone have to guess how you feel from body language?
Actually I disagree with the idea of evil being a supernatural force.
I see good and evil and being 'beneficial' or 'harmful' to survival of others. Evil behavior therefore, is that which causes harm to others.
We can break it down to:
Evil is egocentric narcissism minus affective empathy. In other words, good vs evil are just words used to explain a complex set of behaviours and effects thereof.
Yes I agree. Good and evil are relative.
Also the concept of morality is deeply affected by whats acceptable in the "current" society. Therefore a person can acknowledge that his action is "morally unacceptable" but at the same time think his action is good because it is beneficial acording to his values.
yes, that's why it is ignored. it's ironic
Doing harm=evil, it's simple and clear.
@@henrywang6931 - Interesting, I don't see morality as a societal construct, but as a personal set of rules. If society defines morality, then whatever is legal in your surroundings would be "moral" whereas illegal things would be "immoral." I take great issue with that thought, because certain things are legal in my country that I consider to be highly immoral. And the religion I used to belong to was allll about moral versus immoral things, but I disagree on many of that religion's opinions about what is and isn't immoral, so implying religion can substitute for society on "what is moral?" doesn't count for me either. Now, what you've said may be true for a lot of people who would rather let society/religion think for them, so you do have a point there, but I think it's a sad point.
thank god for psychology research
God has nothing to do with it.
Excellent talk!
Thanks for posting! I got a lot out of this.
We need empathy to keep evolving .
No
"The psychopaths only showed reduced physiological response when they saw people in distress." But if they had no affective empathy, shouldn't that response be equal to the neutral case, not lower?
Important now more than ever
I’ve never heard anyone explain the difference between empathy and sympathy.
I was expecting this to be "there's no empathy any more. society is going to hell in hand basket" speech. I'm glad it's not.
Dude is Borat's cousin. Look it up.
best comment so far. Just what I was thinking.
I was going to say, for a Kazakhstani man, this guy has an amazingly beautifully formed & learned British accent! :-)
Talented family.
That's Kazakh. -stan is the place of the Kazakhs.
You'll note that he is also Bruno's cousin.
I believe is his BROTHER.
Empathy is like humor, it can include and exclude. Empathy is not a virtue, but a way of targeting compassion. That's why a lack of cognitive empathy (i.e. Autism) can lead to universal compassion. Ironically, the presence of empathy is necessary for selectively withholding compassion.
great great talk, didn't know there were two kinds of empathy and good to know it! maybe at the end in the benefits of empathy part, use arguments that can convince people lacking empathy (in addition to "solving conflicts). Because I'm not sure they care about conflicts stopping. My question is : how to convice these people that it's good for them to balance their lack of empathy with à work on how they behave. also, can empathy be learnt if it can be unlearnt ? and how?
Enilo +
especially affective empathy one is mostly born with - but it can be ruined. watching too much horrific movies etc. or being told that what you are feeling is not ok. so empathy can also be fostered in ppl - i have made the experience that if you affectively empathize with ppl, about 99% are actually very touched by your genuine emotion and respect for their feelings. i triggers their (positive) weak spot. most ppl cannot help the re-empathize one you empathize. so one can actually start a empathy-evoking positive spiral this way. also, have a pet, treat it nicely and open your heart up to animals, smell a flower, watch a butterfly dance in the air, be amazed by the beauty of a little glittery rock - and of course - nurture a baby - all that makes you feel yourself and the world and also it makes your body produce oxytocin - the wonderdrug that makes you love.
*2:38** u feel & act on high affective empathy❣️*
3:44 *Blind Obedience🧟♂️to Authority🤥erodes it*
5:44 *Abuses💥& Traumatic Events=Burnouts😱*
Empathy is projection and unrecognized reflection.
Fantastic! Me ha encantado 😊
I disagree with what you are saying based on my own life experiences. One example is being through a job loss. When you hear of another person going through a job loss you can feel bad for them ( sympathetic ). When you hear of another person going through a job loss you can truly understand where they are at and put yourself in their shoes because you've been there. You can understand that the issues go much deeper than missing a paycheck.
I was expecting more from this speech. He explained why some have empathy (in scientific terms) and why empathy is good (using just rhetoric arguments), but is there anything that could be done to change the biology of brain and hormones of those who lack (affective) empathy, therefore are dangerous to those around them?
He just had 12 minutes talking :p
So how can we classify Adam Lanza? Did he lacked both affective and cognitive empathy?
we should be talking about COMPASSION, not empathy.
COMPASSION is CARING about the others feelings etc.
EMPATHY is KNOWING what the other is feeling etc.
Sadists may have lots EMPATHY. They KNOW what will hurt the other person. They are Lacking COMPASSION!
Read Roy F. Baumeister's "EVIL".
He explains the difference.
You don't surprise me!
@Vane Fal hehe nicely put
@@AnnaMishel nah, thats not what these words mean.
Completely wrong! I work in the field for many years. The person diagnosed with ASD doesn't lack cognitive empathy! Rather if we peal back the most basic surface we will almost invariably find amygdala fear based responses, e.g., over active sensory challenges or hypo, underactive sensory processing challenges, which then results in a withdrawing or ALL or Nothing responses, endocrine wise (HPA axis) increased cortisol reduced oxytocin, etc. Now, when that individual becomes more "comfortable to engage in back and forth reciprocal social-emotional engagement" (i.e., not overwhelmed) then what appeared to be prior "significant deficits in cognitive empathy" no longer exists or is significantly continuously moderately by that individual to feel comfortable and embodied rather than withdrawn, over-reactive or disassociated from social-emotional engagement. This is mirrored to large degrees with complex PTSD.
This video was a few years ago, some improvements have been made. I personally think we're more so delayed. The part about testosterone was also disproven recently.
Would you say that for someone with autism, it's easier for them to know what someone is feeling when the person with autism is an observer/third person compared to when they are the direct second-person?
Also, are people with autism better at understanding people's feelings than they are at understanding/knowing the other person's thoughts/motives?
Perhaps people with autism have both forms of Empathy but our empathy goes with the expressions and body language not the words because we see the deceit on a subconscious level
I loved it !!!
The problem with Baron Cohen is that he doesn't make it clear enough that autistics (often but not always) lack only cognitive empathy. Psychopaths and autistics are opposites - as he says part way through but there are a lot of stupid people (some of whom have made comments) and this needs to be spelled out from them right at the beginning because they don't have the required IQ level to understand the slight waffling style of Baron Cohen. I'm autistic and so are my children. I could cry at this ignorance; not for me but for all the innocent, caring, sensitive autistics whose characters are being denigrated.
+penny mcdonagh He's not linking autistic people with psychopaths. He said that their psychology mirrors each other, based on empathy subsets, rooted in the cognitive and affective parts of what constitutes empathy scientifically.
Allegorically, it is a character or personality foil. Classic and chief amongst these in a Western Christian perspective might be the story of Cain and Abel.
Sorry if I wasn't able to expound upon my perspective in a way that I'd have liked, but what I was trying to convey is just what you shared.
Autistic and sociopathic behavior are as you said, in opposition based on their empathy profiles.
Thank you for being so rigorous!
+penny mcdonagh i am in favor of this comment and the subsequent replies and interactions.
He isn't willing to acknowledge that his earlier work (Sally-Anne test, which is highly criticized as profoundly flawed) was not only incorrect, but very damaging tot he autistic community. So he came along later with his distinction between cognitive empathy and affective empathy (intellectually dishonest). And still, in the titles of his books and talks, he continues to link autistics to sociopathy, evil and a lack of empathy, thereby continuing the damage he did originally. I am autistic and an academic, and I have rarely seen such tenacity in intellectual dishonesty in my life. I think Simon Baron-Cohen owes the autistic community a real apology and he should stop protecting his flawed research and do something to provide redress for the harm he has caused.
penny Sings +
This guy doesn’t bring up the fact that politics attracts sociopaths and psychopaths.
I got stuck within two minutes, when Simon Baron-Cohen says that traditionally, humans have explained away cruel behaviour to being possessed by a supernatural force, after which we'd say the human is bad. Logically, it would be the supernatural being possessing the human that is bad, not the human.....so it is not circular after all. : /
I think you've entangled the two points a little bit further than what was intended. He's merely pointing out the oft unexamined understanding of 'evil'.
***** If you had any respect for 'serious academic work' you'd use logical argument and not unsubstantiated ad hominem to discuss this point. We are 'wrong' about either comment? They're both just interpretations of particular comments he made during the video. How are they 'wrong'?
***** So they are incorrect because they are incorrect! Thanks for that. How about taking a class in fundamental logic. I pinned you as a moron based on your first comment but decided to give you a second chance. I see that hasn't worked out.
***** Incorrect because I am incorrect = circular logic. You may not have specifically used those terms but you've yet to produce a rationale explaining why Mira or I are wrong. I asked "How are they wrong?" referring to my comment and Mira's. You answered "They are factual statements that are in correct." (sic) That is circular logic.
***** this is great. so you're proposing that, as a statement of fact by the way, that it is incorrect to infer from the speaker that that the concept of evil is used without appropriate examination, because I've apparently insinuated that it was a statement of fact - which I didn't - I wrote 'I think' at the beginning of the comment for a reason.
But then the concept of "God" I am supposed to take as a fact? Really? Where is the evidence for the existence of a God? Because people say so in ancient writings?
And of course 'all people' in 'the past'. The past extends to every second before that talk was spoken. He doesn't mean that literally everyone in the past thought that. He was using it as a metaphor to describe our collectively improved understanding of mental illness.
You need to understand there are different rules of discussion for different platforms based on their ends. The idea of this TED talk isn't to propose universal facts on the nature of 'evil' it is to stimulate wider discussion on the idea of 'evil' and disseminate a different way of approaching it. Not every statement needs to exist in perfect factual and semantic accuracy. Academic rules of discussion don't apply to youtube comments either. Certain liberties need to be taken by the reader and the commenter.
You are just going around the internet calling people 'wrong' and 'mentally deficient' who disagree with you.
Norman, I think you mean they would lack affective empathy and have good cognitive empathy (which means they can deceive).
Another Aspie chiming in here disagreeing that we can't have proper cognitive empathy, because I have it in spades and as others here have pointed out, it can get so intense it's overwhelming. But there's more in this presentation that bugs me, especially regarding separating empathy into two distinct types that are then charted into neat little categories. Let's look at what that means at face value:
High cognitive, high affective: I see someone crying on the subway. I feel their pain. I walk over and ask, "Are you okay? Do you need help?"
High cognitive, low affective: I see someone crying on the subway. I feel their pain. I leave. (Maybe I feel horrible for leaving, but I still leave.)
Low cognitive, low affective: I see someone crying on the subway. I don't feel their pain. I leave. (And I don't feel bad about it at all.)
Low cognitive, high affective: I see someone crying on the subway. I don't feel their pain. I walk over and ask, "Are you okay? Do you need help?"
I find that last category a bit jarring. It feels like a logic error. What kind of leap does it take, to offer help to someone without first feeling a sense of shared pain? It reads more like a nice-societal impulse, a "doing the right thing" moment, but does that really count as empathy? I guess if these categories really exist, the last combination is the one I least understand, and I want to disbelieve it exists at all. I want to say that mimicking an empathy-like interaction isn't empathy; in the above example it's a good deed, yes, but not empathy.
And I think that's where the categories fall apart, and draws attention to how the rest may be fundamentally flawed as well. I feel like the first two categories belong together, in that the second example could be a person who has had negative life experiences regarding helping others, or being offered help from others. So yeah, breaking something as complex as empathy into two categories with high/low variants just doesn't work, in my utterly biased opinion.
Do you grow your own veg or do you buy it in a shop? If you buy it in a shop, do you source the produce (find out where, and how, and by whom it is grown/gathered)? Vegans always talk about how cruel it is to eat meat, and they might have a point, but most I've encountered overlook the conditions the immigrant workers who gather their food work and live in. Not exactly a great showing of empathy either.
yes Jeannie your correct that is what I meant.
I argue that the child inherited the pathology, and there was a sense of parental love, because the parent also had that pathology. Not because of what the parent did or didn’t do.
You inherit genes not pathology for pathology is the study of the path not the past
Is it possible that people with autism are simply more honest? Or more connected with their bodily expressions and emotions interconnected with The words they say?
Is it possible that people without autism are struggling between the right and left brain, one side of the brain controlling their subconscious showing through to people with autism through their bodily expressions and language, this being read and processed by the person with autism and not matching the words creating an emotional turmoil in the individual with autism?
Is it possible that it's the people without autism that have their minds split and their expressions are not actually lies but just a separate brain speaking than the words coming out of their mouth?
Can someone with autism that has been trained how to control their autonomic nervous system become human lie detectors?
Any studies on the link between IQ and affective/cognitive empathy.
None
People with low empathy can be more intelligent
Well if you use the LOA then those who focus more on somenthing shall attain that..
@@ishthefish9006 either can be its a case by case study you cant generalize on this
-So THAT's why I want to brutally exterminate all psychopaths, while performing cruel-but-effective experiments on them... Cool.
Knowledge can be so healing.
Borat approves
Yes, there's several ways, Simon's work is effectively a map and offers no solutions but an in-depth assessment of what need to be done, a company granted by SENS foundation has found ways to recover what Simon revealed to be the empathy circuit by inducing developmental plasticity and neurogenesis.
Autism/Sociopathy is curable by these means, but unfortunately are currently tedious, expensive and not refined for mass treatment, read Simon's book The Science of Evil, it's very informative.
Autism is a neurological type determined in utero. There is no 'cure' for it except via eugenics.
Yes,because all morality rests on what people eat. /s
If anything,given the hierarchical nature of human development,I would say care of animals would be higher on the list.This is reached at different times by different people, but humans weren't able to have math before they were able to survive. We can't even get people to care about the poor in America-Once we do, we'll gradually move to respect for animals. Culture and art, like animal rights is a component of societal development.
fascinating..
I LIKE!!! Imagine who the parents think is the good son... this guy is Borats brother. Crazy
cousin
Seems there is not always a correlate between what he calls empathy (whatever he thinks is good) and the economy of practician. World view dominates whatever the disposition being practiced, whether for good or for evil. In this model empathy, Hitler was wonderful in his circle of believers, full of empathy for the master race. There must be an idea to embrace that is good, or it's all about useless passion.
Empathy is merely the ability to feel for another person, and to act upon it as if that other was oneself.
A doctor might feel for his suffering patient, yet amputate his leg to save his life - choosing to empathize with the patient's desire to live over his feelings of pain and loss.
Murder, widely accepted as The ultimate evil, is not necessarily an act of cruelty. One might shoot an armed home invader to death, not from lack of empathy to the burglar, but out of true empathy to his endangered family.
Hitler had no empathy for his own people either, as individuals, only as an extension of his self, them being the source of his power.
He was a cruel man in all respects, and that was the basis to the formation of distorted views that justified genocide, saying "My people are Me, and therefor worthy". Everyone else who is not like "Me" (i.e. blond hair and toothbrush mustache) is a lower form of life that do not deserve to exist. One comes to such ideas of dehumanization of other races only from total lack of empathy on the personal level.
Charlie Fiddler
"Hitler had no empathy for his own people either, as individuals, only as an extension of his self, them being the source of his power."
But why couldn't you just say that the man shooting the burglar because he empathized with his family, only did so because they were "extensions" of him as well?
Martin Årvik Martin Årvik That was only an example. One would probably do the same to protect a friend's children, or even just an innocent stranger, often putting oneself in danger. That is a perfectly selfless act.
Would an officer first ask a victim "are you from MY county" before shooting the armed attacker? of course not! He empathizes with the victim who is thinking "I want to live! Why should I die because of this evil jerk?" and he responds by doing what the victim would have done himself, if in his power. He eliminates the threat, killing in the process a menace that forfeited his own right to live by knowingly electing to forfeit a fellow human's life.
He might also try to empathize to some degree with the criminal, by putting himself in his place, but than he thinks: "But I wouldn't be doing this!". At most, he might attempt to only maim him, if at all possible.
I think this course of action would be an objective result of both logical and emotional analysis, and definitely an instinctive reaction.
Some people might even find the courage to selflessly kill themselves or a loved one, if they thought they were presenting a threat to others.
Hitler, on the other hand, hung many of his top generals including innocent parents wives and children, mercilessly wiping out the families of those that were closest to him, based on the slightest suspicion (that eventually was found to have been purposely leaked by the enemy!)
Seems like sadists lack affective empathy way below the zero level to become an outright pleasure.
this is excellent!
What about sadists? they have to have empathy to know what will hurt!
Yes, a fact that is incomprehensibly ironic...
The sound isn’t great on this.
Psychiatrists Lack empathy !!!
Brother of Sasha?
Human treat,Empathy,
-cognitive(psycho),effective(autism)
Your right, He gave no real life situations to explain anything, Just other peoples tripe experiments, { Asking hardened criminals poisoned to society to weep because they were shown a kid crying who for all they know just dropped their ice cream } And he completely missed out the difference between sympathy and empathy, As to the drug idea, There are anti psychotic drugs etc,, But a drug administered to make you care and think of others ? Very unlikely, If at all possible
Interesting that you point out someone's opinion on a picture matters, or confusion over what actually might be going on behind the picture. I was recently playing Fallout 76 and followed a quest involving a missing child. To avoid spoilers in case anyone cares, I'll be brief and say that the quest involves an audio recording of the child talking to his abductor. The kid's tone of voice and shrieking says to the empathy part of my brain, "oh my gods, he's literally dying or pleading for his life." The actual words of the recording? He's begging for a present the guy is promising him. The voice actor played the kid so spoiled and demanding that his not being immediately handed the present has him sounding like his very life is being ripped from him.
I like
I down graded my Empath to Narcs,sociopaths & psychopaths
5:53
Has anyone tested our political leaders [ cameeron, obama, etc] for cognative or affective empathy, i would be astonished if they dont have a very low degree of either.
please teach my Prime Minister Scott Morrison empathy he needs to raise Pensions and Newstart to prevent Suicide in pensioners and unemployed people he is without a social conscience
I can't listen. his "s" sounds are too sharp. hurts my ears
What is wrong with You?
dude is arguing that one is responsible. a psychological, or sociopathalilogical person does know the rules. we can't put them all to death. we have to find different ways.
The example of the Israeli and Palestinian peace campaigners is a false one. All of the factors that work against empathy are fully employed by the oppressors when one group of people seek to oppress another group of people. Most Israelis have much more work to do to recover their empathy than the Palestinians because for them it is not a question of individual psychology, collectively they have deliberately adjusted their moral values to meet their material and territorial goals.
The sound is really bad.
No it is not.
I would imagine it would be lower given the nature of politicians. However, as a measure among the politicians themselves, I would imagine people like Obama vs. Romney, Romney would likely show lower levels empathy, given the nature of most businessmen.
Baron-Cohen is just factually wrong in citing the study of a photo of a man's eyes and four guesses as to the man's emotions: feeling sorry, bored, interested, joking. Film editor Lev Kuleshov already proved the folly of such tests. A test like this also fails in ruling out the possibility of everyday performativities like irony, sarcasm, impersonation, etc in which we affect expressions intentionally contrary to our meaning. The only correct answer is: not enough information. The real lack of affective empathy comes in not seeing the obviousness of the test's flaws.
Empathy is a Perfect Tool for Narcissists, Sociopaths & Psychopaths
Perfect for Police & Politicians.
TEDx TALKS: c'mon guys. I really like you, but seriously - the sound? I have it on maximum and I barely hear it :/
The sound is fine.
Who could think this is Borat's brother.
He's actually Borat's (Sascha Baron Cohen ) cousin..check him out on Wikipedia..
Let's talk about the RAGING PSYCHOPATH WITH NO EMPATHY IN THE White House.
MONSANTO?
I am a Nihilist. I do not view Morality as having any weight or natural occurrence in the universe.
However, despite my lack of belief in the concepts of Good and Evil, I am still a feminist, a socialist, and I anything but apathetic to the plight of others. I enjoy seeing others laugh and enjoy themselves. As social progress is made, I am pleased.
Not because feminism, socialism, Bernie Sanders, or justice are "Good" things, but rather because I have an empathetic connection with my fellow humans and desire to see as many people as possible as satisfied as possible.
Nihilism and Apathy do not always mix.
+peytongonavy Would you consider yourself low effective empathic or simply cognitive or neither?
+peytongonavy I ask because your self definition of nihilist while then adhering to ideologies and power figures is a bit off putting from where I'm sitting. Would you or have you thought about how nihilism when matched with an acceptance of group relations and authoritative figures can be.....well, at best a roll of the dice for the simple welfare of those people you claim to desire to see satisfied. Would you do a better job than those "leaders?" Because just by saying they don't always mix, you have not stated they don't mix in you...I got quite the other impression actually. Do you see your logic error above? Did you intend it is another question. ;-)
insanity
Ooana.
I consider my affective empathy very high. I care deeply about the pain suffered by others.
My cognitive empathy I'm still investigating. I've come to the conclusion that I can't read sarcasm, like, AT ALL. But, if I may use some video game lingo, my "speech skill" is very high. That is, I'm a terrific liar and I'm pretty good at getting people to like me.
Also, at the risk of sounding arrogant, I must consider that I got pretty lucky with my genes. My parents are attractive people and as a result, I would consider myself attractive.
Looking the way I do makes it a lot easier to talk people around to my way of thinking when we're face to face.
Socialism is a horrible way of expressing how empathetic you are. Socialism creates equity, yes, but only because it makes everyone poor.
Sounds like it might be psyop propaganda to me, as it encourages the 'feelings over facts' nonsense in a very sneaky way. He presents some "facts" with the "feelings" and makes you think its balanced, but fails to mention a massive chunk of sociological impact from "empathy". The issue is far too broad and complex to simply suggest "more empathy" is the solution, but saying that does leave the masses open to further exploit.
....talk about riddled with problems...
Empathy is a total FANTASY, a complete lie!, there is ONLY sympathy. No one actually resonates with another person's pain, but they can assign similarities with what they themselves MAY have felt.
Good vs Evil: God vs Satan. God's trump card, Jesus. People are influenced by their environment and spiritual factors to behave as they do, and then, of their own free will, act. Without an acceptance of God's will, can and will eventually be unempathetic.
It is funny how averse people are to this term "evil". I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but I'm starting to wonder if it's just part of Satan's plan to conveniently let the world forget he was ever there.
there's got to be a better example than 9/11. stopped watching at 3:31. BIG SUBJECT, including the acceptance that terrorists flew planes into the WTC's.
Well, weren't they terrorists by your measures, no matter _who_ they where or why they did it?
Lol
I wonder if Doctor Cohen has ever taken any of his own tests? I'm sincere. He seems awfully rigid.
Trump should have been vetted with an empathy test. lol
Deadly dull talk.
You have to be intelligent to get anything from it.